The dominant neighborhood conception, based on the neo-ecological approach of the Chicago School, assumes that neighborhood relations occur in delimited spaces, virtually disconnected from urban totalities and around significantly homogeneous and cohesive communities. This article demonstrates that: 1) In Chile, the ideological use of this neighborhood concept has become hegemonic in public policies and in the academic sphere, has legitimized and reproduced the fragmentation of the associative social fabric, and has reduced the capacity of the actors to participate in the production of the urban; and 2) In spite of the institutionalized restrictions, it is possible to dispute the meaning of the neighborhood based on territorial praxis. The article analyzes two case studies in which, from a fragmented organizational base, the actors were able to articulate themselves in ways that made their spatial frames more complex, diversified the forms and levels of linkage, and improved the communities' capacity for advocacy. Both cases show that neighborhood relations can be understood beyond the predominant idea of neighborhood, that is, not constrained by physical delimitations (what we call 'closed neighborhood'), but with expansive flexibility beyond them ('open neighborhood'); not limited to homogeneous communities, but organized in networks that articulate different types and modalities of community.